By Pepper Parr
July 5th, 2016
BURLINGTON, ON
It was as if there was a very badly behaved boy in the room and no one knew quite what to do with him – so they let him continue misbehaving.
Ward 5 Councillor Paul Sharman, second from the right, made city council look like a bunch of children in a sand box when he called for recorded votes for everything – including the motion to adjourn.
Before the meeting of city council got started Monday evening ward 5 Councillor Paul Sharman spoke up and said he wanted a recorded vote at which point Mayor Goldring looked at him and asked if he wanted a recorded vote on the confirmation of the minutes of the previous city council meeting.
There was a look of almost total incredulity on the Mayor’s face.
Intense to the point of making delegations uncomfortable ward 5 Councillor Paul Sharman exceeded some of his past boorish behavior at the July 4th council meeting.
Sharman then gave one of his ideologically tainted comments about how in the past a member of council had called for recorded votes for political reasons.
And for reasons that he never made clear proceeded to ask for a recorded vote on everything.
And so city council spent 95% of the 25 minute meeting standing and voting then sitting down. Sharman asked for a recorded vote to adjourn the meeting.
There wasn’t a single word on any matter of significance spoken other than a resolution the Mayor announce he was going to be bringing forward related to climate change and the way Burlington was going to be working with Hamilton in the future.
City clerk Angela Morgan was getting ruffled with the behaviour and had on one occasion to explain that procedurally she was having a problem with what they were trying to do
Paul Sharman who served on the Shape Burlington Committee before being elected to office was described as a a bit of a “bull in a china shop”. He appears to have maintained that personality trait.
There were more than 12 recorded votes taken – which meant that the Clerk had to declare what the motion was and ask those in favour of the motion to stand while she read out their names after which they sat down.
The really sad point is that the council meeting was broadcast live by Cogeco cable and will be available on the city web site– anyone will be able to see the broadcast.
It was a disgustingly childish behaviour. Members of Council were grinning like children who seemed to feel they were in on this high school prank.
It is regrettable that the Mayor did not choose to recess the meeting for a period of time. The Procedural bylaw may not have allowed him to do very much.
City council meetings are scheduled but can be called at any time by the Mayor. One wonders what would have happened if the Mayor had put forward a motion to adjourn the meeting for a short period of time while the “children” thought about how poorly they were behaving.
There are far too many times when Councillor Sharman chooses to be abrasive and needlessly challenges people.
It was not a very proud moment for the best mid-sized city in Canada.
The scary thing about it was that Paul Sharman in 2010 filed papers at city hall to run for the office of Mayor – he changed his mind then when Rick Goldring filed his papers to run as Mayor.
The gene pool for politicians in this city is not all that strong – is it?
Oh yes you are!!!
An example please.
Mike, you ride both sides of the fence. Sometimes you seem to have no issues with council ‘hiding’
Alice:
Can you give an example? I don’t believe that I’ve ever been in favour of Council “hiding”. Not generally a “muggawumper”.
Supplemental – and let’s start to actively constrain the occasions when Council retires to a closed door session “on the advice of Legal Counsel”. At minimum, the specific reason(s) that the closed session is needed should be explicitly cited and the general results known immediately after the session is concluded.
JQ Public is “spot on”. As part of Council’s commitment to transparency and accountability, all votes should be recorded so that we know each elected member’s voting record. No more collective hiding in the generalized ‘motion carried’ or ‘motion defeated’. And the technology has been there for years (decades?) to automate the process at nominal cost. No problem with what Sharman did (even if only to prove a point) and full support for Meed Ward. Let’s start to walk the talk.
Before a decision could be reached on if our how to record all votes, a simple question has to be answered, WHY?
There are pros and cons for each side of this debate, some are obvious like your suggestion of recording voting records, others are not, like using those records in negative campaign rhetoric.
Our neighbours to the south provide an example of how a voting record leads to divisive politics.
Recording votes doesn’t change the decision or advance the city in any way. It does however polarise the city, pitting one ward, citizen group or councilor against the other.
Councilors need the ability to vote in the best interest of the city, that doesn’t mean we would always agree but, it does provide us with a vote that isn’t tainted with undue pressure.
We can’t assume the motives of councilors asking to record votes, we can only watch the consequences, messy isn’t it ?
John:
I beg to differ. I think that recorded votes are a necessary subset of complete transparency which, in turn, is a fundamental component of accountability. The latter I have found somewhat lacking here – too many places to hide. I certainly don’t believe that it leads to “divisive politics, a “polarised city” or ‘pits one ward, citizen group or Councilor against the other’. For what it’s worth.
If you find your councilor isn’t as transparent or accountable as he or she should be tell them, do what you can to correct it.
Personally I have a councilor that has not hidden from decisions, we don’t always agree however, everything there is to know is transparent.
Unanimous, six to one or four to three votes all produce the same decision.
If it’s important to know how your councilor voted on an issue, just ask, you should be able to get an answer.
Editor’s note: Why should a citizen have to call and ask how their council member voted – these are public events – the information is public and should be easily available.
Editors note
That could bee said for all public information however it’s rarely the case, especially the easy part.
Recording, and maintaining a searchable information base large enough to accommodate all committee and council votes for the time a councilor or mayor is in office seems overkill.
Yet that’s what would be required to build the history of recorded votes for each member..
We have councilors with 20 plus years of votes, is it important to know every position taken?, some I am sure the councilors would not remember.
Editor’s note:
There were 17,659 people eligible to vote in ward 3 – which is where I believe you are located. 5,072 of them voted. Would you have those 5,072 people call their member of council every day or so? Modern communications is about making information available to people whenever they want – and no forcing them to have to talk to someone they might not like or didn’t vote for.
Do I care how they voted to adjourn a meeting or to receive committee information?, probably not.
Sifting thru all the votes I would find a for or against checkmark. Would their be staff information or the councilors reasoning for that vote?, probably not.
Today in a few seconds I can send a text message or email and inquire on the specific vote of interest. It may take a moment or even a day to get the answer however, I have engaged my councilor and get the full story with a better understanding of his or her decision. Often the reasoning is far more important than the vote.
A simple question provides more information than the minutes of the meeting or a recorded vote, regardless of how you record it.
Editors note
The volume of inquiries you suggest would overwhelm any councilor.
Given what is available, if I feel it’s important to understand the perspective of a councilor I inquire, as for what others do I can only offer my experience as a suggestion.
In my response to your first note, I explain the shortcomings of a recorded vote information base, further to that …
A councilors vote for or against does not reflect complete information. Sacrificing the full story to make information available whenever we want doesn’t provide the transparency or accountability the recorded vote sets out to accomplish. In fact, it can distort the councilors intentions and perspective.
As an example I offer the last vote on the city budget, it was a recorded vote.
If I were to look at just the for or against votes, I would see 5 councillors and the mayor voted to increase my taxes. Assuming I didn’t like my taxes going up, and I didn’t, 5 councilors and the mayor would be viewed negatively, base sole on a recorded vote.
Were there reasons for voting this way?, yes, and they all explained them.
Their explanations helped me to better understand something I wasn’t to happy about, changed my perception of their votes and obtain a more informed opinion. Without that detail or only having the recorded vote to guide me, my opinion would be negative and misinformed.
That’s the part of the story recorded votes don’t give us.
If I like or voted for my councilor is irrelevant, he or she would be my source of information if I wanted an explanation regarding how or why they voted the way they did, at least until the next election when my preference and vote would be relevant.
Editor’s note: We can end this thread now.
All votes should be recorded, but it should be done with an automated system that is activated by a Councillor pushing either a “For” or “Against” button, with a visual indicator for the audience. No need for the delays mentioned in the article or by commentors.
Councillor Sharman does it, he’s considered childish.
Councillor Meed Ward does it, she’s considered a modern day Robin Hood.
Clearly Councillor Sharman was fed up with something, and decided to make a point. If not to us, then to his fellow Council Members. Did he break any rules? No. Did he ask for anything out of line or inappropriate? No. He’s not childish, there’s just very likely more going on here than we know.
Yes, this is the behavior of our decision makers. This is far from the first time that the horse shoe attendees (councilors) have behaved far from professional. I have attended many meetings and watched many…it’s an absolute joke!!! This is what we pay for!!
Why do we call politicians “childish” if the bylaws state that the process is available to use. Yes, some may not appreciate the slow down of the procedure but how do we tell our children that it is part of the process if they feel that they will be reprimanded by the press that cover the story?
I personally am not a Paul Sharman supporter or fan of his politics but give the guy a break. Who cares if he is using it to get ready to run for Mayor or not? Until the bylaws of the council change, let the councillor follow within the bylaws of the political procedure set out in front of them.
Remember now that Burlington is now the greatest midsize city in the country to live in, we don’t have to live under w microscope for minor issues as such.
Councilor Sharman actually gave everybody the opportunity to see what a council meeting would be like if all votes were recorded.
This idea has been championed by councilor Meed Ward for some time, now we know how silly it would be.